Keep Texans Talk Google Ad Free!
Venmo Tip Jar | Paypal Tip Jar
Thanks for your support! 🍺😎👍

Are we overusing Foster?

Are we overusing Foster?

  • Yes

    Votes: 47 37.0%

  • No

    Votes: 80 63.0%
  • Total voters
    127
This is what happens when you get big leads, you run the ball. It really sucks that we're winning so much, it's really tearing me up.
 
Foster is averaging 29 touches per game. That's OK for a 3 game stretch. Not OK over the course of the season. Tate needs to get more carries.
 
Vinny said:
1st of all, we've only played chumps, so Foster's carries (extrapolating them forward) are out of kilter. We won't be ahead by 20 points and playing the Beevis and Butthead of quarterbacks going forward (anyone else notice that Gabbert kinda looks like a cross between Butthead and Kirk Douglas?). Answering the thread question directly is simple....yesterday told me that we will be using Tate plenty. I thought he (Kubiak) rotated him in early and often.
Click to expand...

But see, "early and often" is what I believe to be the problem. Tate doesn't need those carries early in the game - or through three quarters. You don't maximize Foster's carries that way and he doesn't get into the proper rhythm...thus his yards per carry (his effectiveness) is down - even going up against "chumps."

Now, against Denver, the Texans set up the run with the pass, which I advocated going into the game, since everyone's going to key on Foster. It worked well for them
That being the case - and if they keep that trend - then Foster's carries for the rest of the season should look like they did in Denver. The difference is, Tate shouldn't really come in unless Foster is gassed from a big run. Otherwise, let's see more of Tate primarily as the guy who runs out the clock in the 4th quarter, maximizing his particular skill set as the guy who picks up those tough yards that helps win games.

There is no reason Foster should be getting chipped hard for those 2 and 3 yards a carry with 8 men in the box to close out the game. Those too many carries for Foster come way at the end of the game where he has no room to glide
 
I don't know that we're overusing Foster so much as we are under utilizing Tate. The NFL season is a long one and I'd really like to have Foster rested and ready by the time the playoffs come around. I'd also like for the Texans to be showcasing Tate for a possible trade at the end of the season. Tate is a weapon that we need to use.
 
Wolf6151 said:
Tate is a weapon that we need to use.
Click to expand...
That fumble against the Broncos didn't help. But, I just don't understand Kubiak's kneejerk reaction of burying a guy on the bench after a fumble. It's not like Tate wouldn't be more cognizant about ball security after the fumble. How often do runners fumble twice in a game? Tate has to be sent out regardless. Because if your plan is to run the ball 35-40 carries/game (which is great), you've got to spread the touches around.
 
Lucky said:
That fumble against the Broncos didn't help. But, I just don't understand Kubiak's kneejerk reaction of burying a guy on the bench after a fumble. It's not like Tate wouldn't be more cognizant about ball security after the fumble. How often do runners fumble twice in a game? Tate has to be sent out regardless. Because if your plan is to run the ball 35-40 carries/game (which is great), you've got to spread the touches around.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree with Kubiak benching Tate after that fumble. He's sending a message that turnovers will not be tolerated.

Today I expect both Tate and Foster to have a monster game against the Titan's weak run defense, so much so that I'm starting Tate as a flex option in my fantasy league. I think the Texans are going to do to the Titans what they did against the Jaguars...drain clock on offense through the run game. I don't think there will be any long bombs from Schaub to Johnson this week.
 
Lucky said:
That fumble against the Broncos didn't help. But, I just don't understand Kubiak's kneejerk reaction of burying a guy on the bench after a fumble. It's not like Tate wouldn't be more cognizant about ball security after the fumble. How often do runners fumble twice in a game? Tate has to be sent out regardless. Because if your plan is to run the ball 35-40 carries/game (which is great), you've got to spread the touches around.
Click to expand...

It's not just about that game.

Tate has not been the most secure ball carrier and if he's going to get late carries in a game he needs to have it ingrained in his head that ball security is the most important thing.

If we're in a one score game in the play offs ( or superbowl) and Tate fumbles, that could cost us the game.

If you throw Tate back in there he's not fully feeling the magnitude if his mistake. If he knows that if he fumbles and will be put back in
regardless he's not as dialed in to ball protection.

With him sitting on that sideline afterward and seeing Denver make that comeback I'm pretty sure we won't be seeing any late game fumbles from him for a while unless a defender just makes a phenomenal play.

I can almost guarantee kubiak and/or Harris went to tate after the game and explained that they will need him for the rest of the season but fumbling the ball like that just won't be tolerated.
 
I would love to see Tate get more carries. I think Tate needs to figure out how to protect the ball down the stretch and the only way to do that is get him more reps, but punish him if starts fumbling. I think the answer is sit him and bring in Forsett in. All our RBs need reps in this system, and in games where we have a big lead, let the other RBs get reps. It's a long season, and we need everyone healthy.
 
Foster still got about 5 too many carries today. Tate wasn't getting the job done (5 for 11 yds.), but Forsett could have been given a shot.
 
I think most of you would probably like to reconsider your "no" votes by now. No reason for him to be in there late in the game like that.
 
Kubiak better have some serious pass offense ready for the post season if we are, because I can promise you that if we're strictly a run team defensive lines will be studying game film and will be VERY prepared for the Texans in the playoffs.

I don't want to see this man used like Earl Campbell was.
 
Last edited:
Well, he's on pace for 412 carries now, a bit lower than the 432 from before, but still too high. We really need to utilize the backup RBs more. Hell, I wouldn't mind seeing Holliday get a run around the edge.
 
i am starting to worry a little. he's already over 100 carries and even close to this pace will start to wear down when we need him most - postseason.
 
A MUST READ: Effect of Running Back Carries
on Future Production on this very subject that I just fortuitously came across, published today. It covers, in in-depth detail, the very subject we have been debating here.

In fantasy football, it's often difficult to predict which fantasy players will have a significant drop-off in production from one year to the next. This can yield devastating consequences for your team during your fantasy football draft, as you pay a premium price for a player just to have them crush your team with a very substandard season that did not warrant their high draft status. In this article, we will analyze yet another factor that can contribute to a disappointing fantasy season: The effect of Running Back Carries ( Running Back Attempts ).

Running backs are one of the crucial positions in most fantasy football leagues. While running backs can provide a consistently high source of fantasy points week in and week out and are in high demand on fantasy draft day, they are also prone to suffering a significant decrease in production after carrying the ball too many times in the preceding season. A running back's body is a machine, and, like all machines, they can only perform their function so many times before they must be replaced by a newer version (or sent in for repair). With that in mind, there are two measures (absolute and relative) to evaluate the wear and tear of running backs:

1. The absolute measure of the number of carries (attempts) a running back has had in the previous season (Table 1).
2. The relative measure in the increase in the number of carries from season to season (Table 2).

Both of these measures are indicators for a potential drop-off in production from one season to the next, and we have compiled two tables to help illustrate these points. Table 1 lists every NFL player that has experienced a workload of 370 carries or more in a season (through 2011) followed by their performance in the subsequent season.
Click to expand...

Yes, this is a fantasy site. But it has an unbelievably detailed breakdown (with easy-to-review table presentation) of what has happened to all the top high-carry NFL RBs following their work horse exposures..........and, with very isolated exception, it's not very good news at all. If it teaches you anything, it is that the human body has it's limitations.
 
They paid Foster, now they're using Foster. As it should be. Tate will be getting 10-15 carries a game as usual as the season wears on. No need to fret.
 
steelbtexan said:
They paid Foster, now they're using Foster. As it should be. Tate will be getting 10-15 carries a game as usual as the season wears on. No need to fret.
Click to expand...

And at this rate, we'll be paying him for four extra years of bad productivity after this season if he goes over 400 carries this year. Maybe he won't wear down if he does carry the load that much, but history suggests otherwise.

I'd rather not have another Shaun Alexander situation.
 
Plus it's not like Foster is on a pace for a 2000 yard season either, he hasn't even scratched the 4 ypc surface.
 
Ryan said:
Plus it's not like Foster is on a pace for a 2000 yard season either, he hasn't even scratched the 4 ypc surface.
Click to expand...

He still gets hit every with every carry. Doesn't matter if he's gained one yard or ten, he's taken some punishment.

EDIT: Never mind. I think I see your point now.
 
In the Long term? - YES, we are overusing him.

In the Short term? - No, not until I see Arian get fully on-track for one game. I want to see 150+ w/ a 40+ yarder i there before I think our running game looks "normal" again. Once that happens, 50/50 it all you want. Until it does, keep feeding him (steak pun inferred).
 
We all knew that the line was going to be a work in progress this season. And THIS is what we get for that. If our line opens up the holes, Foster will get through them. But even if we run to the left, the right side has to take care of business. Right now, we don't have the Elephants On Parade* working like Gibbs always talked about. The whole line and the wide receivers have to do their jobs and right now, we've got some issues.

So Foster's ypc is going down. Kubes still feels more comfortable with him running the ball than Tate (especially after that fumble that let Denver back in the game.)

Foster's going to get a lot of touches until either Tate steps up or Foster breaks.
 
We've had 20+ point leads in these first 4 games. I reckon any RB would have an extensive amount of carries if their team was up 20 in every game. Will this happen every week? I highly doubt it.

Right now, this is no issue to me
 
TexanSam said:
And at this rate, we'll be paying him for four extra years of bad productivity after this season if he goes over 400 carries this year. Maybe he won't wear down if he does carry the load that much, but history suggests otherwise.

I'd rather not have another Shaun Alexander situation.
Click to expand...

4 years? Let's just focus on going to New Orleans right now. Arian's our first class ticket plane ride there. Like steelbtexan said, we're paying him.
 
NitroGSXR said:
4 years? Let's just focus on going to New Orleans right now. Arian's our first class ticket plane ride there. Like steelbtexan said, we're paying him.
Click to expand...

Problem is we could get close and he could be gassed. I know we have Tate, but we may need every advantage. We could even get there (New Orleans) and suddenly he's gassed. Or, this could turn out to be not our year like we think. Maybe it's next year, but, uh-oh, Foster's done...

Besides, you don't take a talent like Foster and just burn him out. I could go with the argument that this is only happening as long as we have 20 point leads, but it has to stop--scratch that; slow down--at some point or there's likely going to be unforeseen knee issues.
 
You know something, I have no idea if we are actually using up Arian to fast or not. I'm not a coach, and I'm not in the locker room or on the field with them. I'll leave it up to Kubiak. It's all a fan can do.

Well, besides *****. And we do that a lot around here. :lol:

OK, edit to say the asteriks are for typing in the noun for a female dog.
 
CloakNNNdagger said:
A MUST READ: Effect of Running Back Carries
on Future Production on this very subject that I just fortuitously came across, published today. It covers, in in-depth detail, the very subject we have been debating here.



Yes, this is a fantasy site. But it has an unbelievably detailed breakdown (with easy-to-review table presentation) of what has happened to all the top high-carry NFL RBs following their work horse exposures..........and, with very isolated exception, it's not very good news at all. If it teaches you anything, it is that the human body has it's limitations.
Click to expand...



Some more numbers including additional players that didn't quite reach the 390 carries, but were pretty high up there. The pattern is still disturbing.

http://walterfootball.com/fantasy2009mostcarries.php
 
HOU-TEX said:
We've had 20+ point leads in these first 4 games. I reckon any RB would have an extensive amount of carries if their team was up 20 in every game. Will this happen every week? I highly doubt it.

Right now, this is no issue to me
Click to expand...

But that's what I don't understand. You have Tate and Forsett. Why does Arian have to have so many carries when you're already up?
 
That's alot of carries for him and we been "blowing out" teams, Ben Tate should be getting more carriers in the 2nd half and Foster should be resting. It will take a toll on his body in the future.
 
PapaL said:
:fight:
Touché!
Must spread rep blah blah blah
Click to expand...

You're not CRAZY! You don't pay your dues, you don't show up at the meetings, you don't do your community service hours. You've been downgraded. You're no longer "crazy" your just a little "nuts" now.
 
TexanSam said:
And at this rate, we'll be paying him for four extra years of bad productivity after this season if he goes over 400 carries this year. Maybe he won't wear down if he does carry the load that much, but history suggests otherwise.

I'd rather not have another Shaun Alexander situation.
Click to expand...

The Texans have a 3 yr window to win a SB. If giving Foster the ball 350-400 times a yr during this period helps win a SB. Then count me in the give him the d**n ball crowd.

Earl was productive for 6 yrs with a heavy workload and a much more violent running style. Emmitt had a similar running style as Foster (They very rarely take direct hits) and was a workhorse for 10 yrs or better.
 
the chron says Ben Tate is nursing a toe injury, I assume this is why the splits are so wacky and why Tate has been ineffective....hopefully he gets better soon (Foster can keep this pace up until the bye but then he needs to be able to take it easy until playoff time) so Tate has a few weeks to heal up
 
steelbtexan said:
The Texans have a 3 yr window to win a SB. If giving Foster the ball 350-400 times a yr during this period helps win a SB. Then count me in the give him the d**n ball crowd.

Earl was productive for 6 yrs with a heavy workload and a much more violent running style. Emmitt had a similar running style as Foster (They very rarely take direct hits) and was a workhorse for 10 yrs or better.
Click to expand...

When your knees are already swelling from the beginning of the season and your knee remains an issue as demonstrated by the injury reports, you don't necessarily need to take direct hits to get worse......just gross numbers of REPETITION which alone can lead to "overuse knee syndromes" leading to damage of muscle, tendon, cartilage, bone, ligament, or any combination thereof. And this is not to even mention the not uncommon dreaded "compensation" injury. And if not rested overuse syndromes can result in conditions requiring surgery. When we're dealing with all these one year high carry numbers historically, we need to keep in mind that these account for regular season numbers only. Most of the high carry RBs may have never reached the postseason with their teams in those specific years of record high carries despite their numbers, let alone ever reached the Super Bowl..........reaching the Super Bowl would require substantial additional numbers and additional wear and tear.........substantial numbers that will need to be added to Foster's season carries should we be fortunate enough to make the Super Bowl. So many people here are saying Hell with next year, damn the torpedoes full speed ahead, we're only concerned with making the Super Bowl THIS YEAR. You may want to stop and think of the not so unreal possibility of Foster not making it through to the postseason let alone to the Super Bowl, if the present course remains unchanged. But I guess there's always next year.
 
Last edited:
Carries are not the causation for production decline although they correlate strongly. The type and the amount of hits taken is the actual cause of the wear and tear that causes the steep decline.

Look at those backs that carried the ball in that volume, almost all of them are backs that were bangers. None of them were gliders that avoided hits like Foster does.

I also think extrapolating his carries after 4 games for a full season is a pointless task. Lets take a look at his carry numbers again at the halfway mark. More importantly lets keep in mind that Foster's running style negates some of the correlation between carries and decline in production.
 
CloakNNNdagger said:
When your knees are already swelling from the beginning of the season and your knee remains an issue as demonstrated by the injury reports, you don't necessarily need to take direct hits to get worse......just repetition which can lead to "overuse knee syndromes" leading to damage of muscle, tendon, cartilage, bone, ligament, or any combination thereof. And this is not to even mention the not uncommon dreaded "compensation" injury. And if not rested overuse syndromes can to conditions requiring surgery. When we're dealing with all these one year high carry numbers historically, we need to keep in mind that these account for regular season numbers only. Most of the high carry RBs may have never reached the postseason with their teams in those specific years of record high carries despite their numbers, let alone ever reached the Super Bowl..........reaching the Super Bowl would require substantial additional numbers and additional wear and tear.........substantial numbers that will need to be added to Foster's season carries should we be fortunate enough to make the Super Bowl. So many people here are saying Hell with next year, damn the torpedoes full speed ahead, we're only concerned with making the Super Bowl THIS YEAR. You may want to stop and think of the not so unreal possibility of Foster not making it through to the postseason let alone to the Super Bowl, if the present course remains unchanged. But I guess there's always next year.
Click to expand...

I forgot about the knee problems. That is somewhat of a gamechanger for me. They should atleast monitor Fosters carries more closely. Do you think Gary will take this into consideration? I dont.

With that said I belive that this yr is the best chance the Texans have to make the SB, so you've got to ride your horse. If Foster goes down, then Tate will have to step up. Tate is a luxury that the Texans probably will not have next yr. He's the reason I would ride Foster hard this yr.

Plus to achieve greatness sometimes you have to accept the risk and move forward. I'm not worried about Fosters workload at this point because as the season wears on his carries should get reduced at some point without Gary having to make a conscious effort to do so.
 
steelbtexan said:
I forgot about the knee problems. That is somewhat of a gamechanger for me. They should atleast monitor Fosters carries more closely. Do you think Gary will take this into consideration? I dont.

With that said I belive that this yr is the best chance the Texans have to make the SB, so you've got to ride your horse. If Foster goes down, then Tate will have to step up. Tate is a luxury that the Texans probably will not have next yr. He's the reason I would ride Foster hard this yr.

Plus to achieve greatness sometimes you have to accept the risk and move forward. I'm not worried about Fosters workload at this point because as the season wears on his carries should get reduced at some point without Gary having to make a conscious effort to do so.
Click to expand...

That luxury can disappear very quickly. Tate's "toe issue" has me very concerned. Why the Texans have been reluctant to characterize his injury further has me very concerned, until I hear otherwise, that he may be dealing with TURF TOE.
 
steelbtexan said:
Earl was productive for 6 yrs with a heavy workload and a much more violent running style. Emmitt had a similar running style as Foster (They very rarely take direct hits) and was a workhorse for 10 yrs or better.
Click to expand...

Emmitt broke 370 twice. The second time his ypc were 4.7. After that, they never were better than 4.2.

Regardless, these things can't be based on individuals. It's only a guess of what might happen and probability isn't on Foster's side with that many carries.

I don't have any problem with doing it out of necessity. I just don't understand the reasoning when Tate was running well in the first two games and Forsett is available as well. We're only talking about taking 5 plays per game away.
 
Not the best news.

Houston Texans Houston Texans ‏@HoustonTexans

Kubiak on RB Ben Tate (toe): "If he looks fine (Saturday), then we'll be back to our normal deal...We'll see where Ben's at on Saturday." 3hrs
Click to expand...
 
(on RB Ben Tate’s status ) “I think so. I think if we asked Ben (Tate) to do something today he would’ve done it. I would say the same thing tomorrow but we are going to hold him. We are going to get (RB) Justin (Forsett) ready to go. Then I think what we do Saturday is we let (RB) Ben (Tate) go and if he looks fine, then we’re back to our normal deal. I think the key is that Justin gets the reps because Ben is ready to play. He knows what he’s doing. That’s kind of the way we practiced today. We’ll see where Ben is at on Saturday.”
Click to expand...
link
 
It has only been four games, a quarter of the season, so I can't say that I'm "concerned", but for sure paying attention... Now if it were at the halfway mark and Foster was pacing 400+ that would have me concerned for sure...


I looked up Foster's carries from last year and picked a four-game stretch somewhere in the middle of the season. I then averaged his carries per game for those four games. If you were to apply that average to 16 games, Foster would have been pacing for 368 carries.. of course he finished with 278, almost 100 less than that four-game average would suggest if applied to 16 games... So i guess my point is his carries can be trimmed, whether intentionally or by the design of this system and team that had him carry it only 278 times last season...
 
I don't really think Foster will get 400 carries, but what worries me is that Kubiak seems to think that would be perfectly fine....and I don't.
 
Bludgeon opponents for 3 quarters with our starters the treat the 4th quarter like preseason game 4. That should make everyone happy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top